It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Hunt the Boeing II - Shanksville edition

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 02:07 AM
link   
Playing devil's advocate here - for everyone jumping on diggs, it shouldn't be about what he's saying, but how he is saying it.

diggs, you need to chill. If people don't want to believe you, the statements presented, or would simply rather engage in debate - you can't call them names or act like a horny teen on prom night who just got stood up. Just stand up for what you believe and dopn't be a troll - it takes away from your case. I know you're new and all, but it's really bad nettiquette all-around to call people names and get into pissing contests with moderators.




posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bripe Klmun
Playing devil's advocate here - for everyone jumping on diggs, it shouldn't be about what he's saying, but how he is saying it.

diggs, you need to chill. If people don't want to believe you, the statements presented, or would simply rather engage in debate - you can't call them names or act like a horny teen on prom night who just got stood up. Just stand up for what you believe and dopn't be a troll - it takes away from your case. I know you're new and all, but it's really bad nettiquette all-around to call people names and get into pissing contests with moderators.

I admit, my passion runs hi, but the moderator totally ripped on me. You don't think I'm not going to defend myself? And what would you call someone who ripps on you and then refuses to engage in debate about what they are ripping me about. I don't know about you, but I call that a coward. If I ripped on your beliefs and then ran away with my tail under my legs, I'd expect you to call me a coward too.

I'm also displeased that ATS would allow an immature moderater like that. It looks bad on them.



posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 03:51 PM
link   
Perhaps you would like a robot Moderator? I thought we were promoting humanity, not a robotic, android like NWO full of protocols and doubleplusgood behaviour.
It's hardly being immature, I'm simply pointing out the obvious fact that while you think a lot of your ideas might be the truth, they are more likely the product and design of the people you are fighting in an attempt to distract and discredit.
You think these people can do what you think, yet can't put out ideas? You think you actually have a truly free voice on the Internet? These theories arn't mainstream by accident I assure you, I am convinced they are there to stop us discussing the important issues and could very well be a foundation for a later attack on the Internet and our freedom of speech.
If they didn't want these theories in the Internet mainstream the 'offending' sites would be gone and the relevent people silenced, you may not realise it but you're doing their work. You think they are making mainstream news and media by accident? This is the same mainstream news and media that covered it up from the start right? Just think about the whole thing, take a step back and look at whats happening. There were issues being discussed after 9/11 which have since disappeared from the Internet in a series of hack and discrediting attacks. Back when they were first around there were predictions and alleged leaks saying that smoke screens like the 'No-757' theory would soon propogate wildly and take over - they did. The original information is but a distant memory to a handful of us.
You may not realise it and in fact as devoted as you say and not a shill (yes it's ironically a possibility) then you may very well be a tough and resiliant fighter - for the wrong side. Sorry to say it but it's true, I suggest you try and take a wider outlook on the whole thing, the biggest thing, as I said, of course being the fact that if these theories were anywhere near the truth, then TPTB would have little problem quashing them.
You'll have to excuse my deranged, eccentric manner - but many years of this kind of stuff does your head in.

[edit on 3-6-2006 by AgentSmith]



posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith
You'll have to excuse my deranged, eccentric manner - but many years of this kind of stuff does your head in.

I'll accept your apology.



posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 04:42 PM
link   
Yes well sorry, I can be pretty offensive, it isn't so much a problem with you personally, it's more with what I see going on in my version of the bigger picture... But hey, maybe I'm watching something different than everyone else?



posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 10:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith
Yes well sorry, I can be pretty offensive, it isn't so much a problem with you personally, it's more with what I see going on in my version of the bigger picture... But hey, maybe I'm watching something different than everyone else?

I'd be stoked if you took the challenge. I'm curious what people's thoughts on this crash is and how they can explain all the anomolies.

It's dishearting that this thread is up to 5 pages and only ONE person has attempted to answers all the questions.

[edit on 3-6-2006 by diggs]



posted on Jun, 4 2006 @ 02:08 AM
link   
The aircraft pile drived into the ground at extremely high speed. If you take a stone and throw it into soft, loose earth (remember that the area was an old strip mine) then it will disappear into it without leaving much of a crater. As for the fuel, travelling at that high velocity it will have ended up in the ground as well, don't forget the fuel itself is not actually flammable - it's the vapours that are. If it's soaked into the dirt and underground then it won't vapourise and can't mix with air to form a fuel/air mixture capable of ignition in the first place.


Prosecutors plan to wrap up their case today by playing the cockpit recording tape that was recovered from the strip mining field near Shanksville, Pa., where the plane crashed.
www.latimes.com...




On August 1, 2005, after almost four full years, the federal government released the property where the crash occurred back to the owners. According to The Tribune-Democrat, Somerset County's main newspaper on August 2, 2005: "Miller officially declassified the abandoned Stonycreek Township reclaimed strip mine as a death scene Monday, returning to seven land owners about 100 acres surrounding where the plane plunged into the earth."

Wallace Miller is the county coroner. This front page story in The Tribune-Democrat also shows a photo of pieces of the plane which have worked their way to the surface. This seems so out of the norm because we all know that immediately following any aviation disaster, the FBI and NTSB threaten people with prison if they remove anything from a crash site. Apparently, it's not the same concerning Flight 93.

One of the things that has caused a great deal of confusion and speculation about the crash of Flight 93 is the "entry," if you will, of the plane into the ground. As I said in part two, Flight 93 slammed into the ground at approximately 585 mph. I learned a great deal about strip mining while in the Shanksville area, i.e., what strip mining does to the soil and surrounding area. The easiest way I can describe it is to picture a bed with a blanket on the mattress. The mining company basically lifts the blanket, meaning a large area of top soil, extracts the ore and then lays the blanket back down. The result is that when Flight 93 hit the ground, it didn't break up like you see in other aviation disaster photos. My husband and I were at a United Air Lines crash site, very up close, back in the early 90s; it's something you don't forget. There was a great deal of wreckage everywhere, but the fuselage, while visible, was buried into the ground.

In the case of Flight 93, the ground swallowed what didn't disintegrate. The ground also, due to the effects of strip mining, continues to "belch" up rocks and debris. In this case, small pieces of the plane. One of the engines did bounce and landed in a nearby small body of water which I observed. Once you understand the effects of strip mining on the soil (top and deeper down), viewing the excavation photo in part one, and having been to the site, you can begin to understand why the first photos of the smoking ground look so "odd" and out of step with other plane crashes. In my mind, there is absolutely no question that Flight 93 crashed where the official crash site is marked.
www.devvy.com...



posted on Jun, 4 2006 @ 03:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith
The aircraft pile drived into the ground at extremely high speed. If you take a stone and throw it into soft, loose earth (remember that the area was an old strip mine) then it will disappear into it without leaving much of a crater. As for the fuel, travelling at that high velocity it will have ended up in the ground as well, don't forget the fuel itself is not actually flammable - it's the vapours that are. If it's soaked into the dirt and underground then it won't vapourise and can't mix with air to form a fuel/air mixture capable of ignition in the first place.


AgentSmith, I was hoping you would answer all of the questions. You'll understand why if you do.



posted on Jun, 4 2006 @ 10:00 AM
link   
I did, all the questions relating to the lack of fire and smell of fuel can be attributed to it being buried and soaked into the relatively soft dirt. Don't forget if you could smell the fuel there would be a fuel/air mixture present so there would be an explosion or fire.
The depth of the crater can be easily demonstrated by sifting some dirt and then throwing a stone into it, you'll find it buries itself, leaving a very small indentation.
Same principle applies here.
Regarding the debris, again most of it was buried with some of it scattered in small piece over the area and in the woods. In the eyewitness testimony I posted you'll notice he says he saw an engine in 'a nearby body of water'.
Why would some photographer (who the quote is from) see it? He wouldn't have been allowed to comb the area, he probably viewed it form as distance, perhaps about the distance we see the photographs have been taken from? Hardly a good spot to pick out small piece of debris or to see what lies in the woods.
Regarding the appearance of the smoke plume, just because something may look like something does not mean it is, that was one of the basic hurdles that our ancestors managed to overcome which lead to all the really neat stuff being discovered like the Earth is round and we are not at the centre of the Universe.
The coroner is talking about what it looked like, it pretty much does look like what he is describing - you can see that form the photographs - would you rather he lie? Once again (see above) just because something looks like something does not mean it is. It's called simile, just because you might say 'he's as bent as a butcher's hook' does not suddenly mean that the person in question is, in fact, a butcher's hook. And that's even if it's a coroner that says it.
And why would there be blood? This isn't a Quentin Tarantino movie, if the plane and it's gallons of fuel were absorbed into the soft ground then it figures the people and their bodily fluids would be too right?
Why would there not be paperwork recovered form the scene? How do you know it wasn't buried? If it was shot down which I can quite believe then that would account for some, as well as the fact that as it ripped apart on impact lighter items like that would be carried away easier.
The only thing I think that was odd is the bandana, I find it strange that there is not even any dirt on it, I can understand it may have been thrown off a hijackers head, but who knows?

[edit on 4-6-2006 by AgentSmith]



posted on Jun, 4 2006 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith
I did, all the questions relating to the lack of fire and smell of fuel can be attributed to it being buried and soaked into the relatively soft dirt.

Soft dirt? Come on man, if it was "so soft" the recovery bulldozers there would have sank into the ground. The "soft" accuse was concocted by the gov't to give a plausible accuse why such a large/long plane can seemingly disappear.

Also, if all those thousands of gallons of fuel went into the ground, how did some manage to escape and fling over to a weird angle and burn a large section of forest when and area between the crater and forest wasn't scortched? That's IMPOSSIBLE!


The depth of the crater can be easily demonstrated by sifting some dirt and then throwing a stone into it, you'll find it buries itself, leaving a very small indentation.

There are photos of the evacuation process of the crater and the only thing I see them digging up is dirt. No plane debris in sight.


Regarding the debris, again most of it was buried with some of it scattered in small piece over the area and in the woods. In the eyewitness testimony I posted you'll notice he says he saw an engine in 'a nearby body of water'.

Again I don't get it, if the entire plane was swallowed in this "soft dirt," then how did a huge heavy engine get flung into the small pond a ways away and only small pieces of debris escape and ONLY fall into the forest which is a very weird angle for all the outside debris to be flung? Isn't it coincidental that they only flung into the forest which area would be the easiest to plant debris because of the cover of the trees?

Btw, convenient this stray engine is found in a pond where it would be cooled off and hard to tell if it recently landed in there or was planted! See how I'm having a hard time with all these coincidences?


Regarding the appearance of the smoke plume, just because something may look like something does not mean it is

Just another coincidence then, huh?


The coroner is talking about what it looked like, it pretty much does look like what he is describing - you can see that form the photographs
And why would there be blood? This isn't a Quentin Tarantino movie, if the plane and it's gallons of fuel were absorbed into the soft ground then it figures the people and their bodily fluids would be too right?

I thought I read how body parts were found OUTSIDE the crater and, of course, in the woods? How did they manage to escape the plane and why no blood found around them?


Why would there not be paperwork recovered form the scene? How do you know it wasn't buried? If it was shot down which I can quite believe then that would account for some, as well as the fact that as it ripped apart on impact lighter items like that would be carried away easier.

Photo shows the unburnt piece of paper found outside the crater:



The only thing I think that was odd is the bandana, I find it strange that there is not even any dirt on it, I can understand it may have been thrown off a hijackers head, but who knows?

Or maybe it was planted?

I appreciate you taking the time to answer all of them.



posted on Jun, 4 2006 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by diggs
What? the bottom pic clearly shows the grass unburnt up to the crater and I swear some of the grass is still growing INSIDE the crater!


Okay. Now tell me, if there was grass growing inside the crater - how come the CVR and FDR were found ~30 feet down inside the crater?

PS (Off Topic) I just posted a pic of the tail scoring on the Pentagon in the other thread. (End of Off Topic)



posted on Jun, 4 2006 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aotearoa
Okay. Now tell me, if there was grass growing inside the crater - how come the CVR and FDR were found ~30 feet down inside the crater?

Who says those were found inside the crater?



posted on Jun, 4 2006 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by diggs
Who says those were found inside the crater?

The NTSB "Go Team" who were responsible for investigating the crash.



posted on Jun, 4 2006 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by diggs
Soft dirt? Come on man, if it was "so soft" the recovery bulldozers there would have sank into the ground. The "soft" accuse was concocted by the gov't to give a plausible accuse why such a large/long plane can seemingly disappear.


I think the soft dirt was concocted by the fact the area was an old strip mine, not by the Government. Bulldozers are (funnily enough) designed to spread their weight to enable them to operate in a construction environment, which can quite often be an area with relatively loose soil. Just think about it.



Also, if all those thousands of gallons of fuel went into the ground, how did some manage to escape and fling over to a weird angle and burn a large section of forest when and area between the crater and forest wasn't scortched? That's IMPOSSIBLE!


Well obviously it isn't impossible




There are photos of the evacuation process of the crater and the only thing I see them digging up is dirt. No plane debris in sight.


You need to open your eyes then, just because not all the photos have been made available does not mean they don't exist, why bother releasing them anyway? Those of us that believe (at least some aspects) of what happened don't need convincing and with people like you, even if you were there and saw it with your eyes you'd be convinced the Government had planted the idea into your head with a mind ray.
Besides some close up photos do show debris being dug up and in the hole:







Again I don't get it, if the entire plane was swallowed in this "soft dirt," then how did a huge heavy engine get flung into the small pond a ways away and only small pieces of debris escape and ONLY fall into the forest which is a very weird angle for all the outside debris to be flung? Isn't it coincidental that they only flung into the forest which area would be the easiest to plant debris because of the cover of the trees?


If it was as simple as that then it would not take months even now to recreate with computers simulations aspects of the physics involved. Various pieces were thrown around, bearing in mind again this are some of the few pictures we have been shown:











Btw, convenient this stray engine is found in a pond where it would be cooled off and hard to tell if it recently landed in there or was planted! See how I'm having a hard time with all these coincidences?


That's not a coincidence son, that's called being paranoid.



I thought I read how body parts were found OUTSIDE the crater and, of course, in the woods? How did they manage to escape the plane and why no blood found around them?


Did you? Where's that then, I'm sure it's true but I didn't know. I thought they only found 8% of the human remains?




Why would there not be paperwork recovered form the scene? How do you know it wasn't buried? If it was shot down which I can quite believe then that would account for some, as well as the fact that as it ripped apart on impact lighter items like that would be carried away easier.

Photo shows the unburnt piece of paper found outside the crater:



My point proven.




The only thing I think that was odd is the bandana, I find it strange that there is not even any dirt on it, I can understand it may have been thrown off a hijackers head, but who knows?

Or maybe it was planted?


Maybe, as I said that was the only thing I found slightly odd, though it's not impossible there is a reasonable explanation.

I'll let you know now, so you or anyone reading this doesn't think you've 'won' or that I'm backed into a corner, I can't be bothered to discuss it any further, the (lack of) logic is disturbing and I have better things to do, like go and watch my Monkey Dust DVD. Feel free to throw whatever you want at me and sit back with a smug look on your face thinking you've clinched it, I don't really care. Again, please excuse my slightly impatient tone, but it's frustrating having to watch the investigations go backwards over the years instead of forwards.



posted on Jun, 4 2006 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aotearoa

Originally posted by diggs
Who says those were found inside the crater?

The NTSB "Go Team" who were responsible for investigating the crash.

Oh, so the gov't said they found them deep in the crater?



posted on Jun, 4 2006 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by diggs
Oh, so the gov't said they found them deep in the crater?

I'm not sure if you're aware of this but a lot of the NTSB are forensic scientists. Forensic scientists report on what is factual, they are impartial. They also include pilots, engineers, fire investigators, people specialising in avionics, etc. Their job and their only job is to work out what caused the crash. Versions of the NTSB exist all over the world, under varying names according to their country, of course. The NTSB is so highly thought of that it's often invited to participate in crashes overseas as well as on American soil.

Usually, the airline involved will send a Go Team as well.



posted on Jun, 4 2006 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aotearoa

Originally posted by diggs
Oh, so the gov't said they found them deep in the crater?

I'm not sure if you're aware of this but a lot of the NTSB are forensic scientists. Forensic scientists report on what is factual, they are impartial. They also include pilots, engineers, fire investigators, people specialising in avionics, etc. Their job and their only job is to work out what caused the crash. Versions of the NTSB exist all over the world, under varying names according to their country, of course. The NTSB is so highly thought of that it's often invited to participate in crashes overseas as well as on American soil.

Usually, the airline involved will send a Go Team as well.

You are assuming that there were non-spooks with this team there. Why were they all in white and yellow jump suits? Concealing their identities? Only a hand full of jumpsuits were seen at the Pentagon washing the depleted uranium off them (oops, did I say that?).

And I bet it was just another in a long line of coincidences that part/all of this same team practiced in a terror drill the month before in the neighboring county?



posted on Jun, 4 2006 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith
I think the soft dirt was concocted by the fact the area was an old strip mine, not by the Government. Bulldozers are (funnily enough) designed to spread their weight to enable them to operate in a construction environment, which can quite often be an area with relatively loose soil. Just think about it.

Well maybe that's why are gov't faked the crash at that site, because it WAS an old strip mine with this "soft dirt" and that would give them an answer as to how a plane can disappear. Ever think of that? You did notice the nice service road right next to the crater, right?



Also, if all those thousands of gallons of fuel went into the ground, how did some manage to escape and fling over to a weird angle and burn a large section of forest when and area between the crater and forest wasn't scortched? That's IMPOSSIBLE!

Well obviously it isn't impossible

For a fake crash!


even if you were there and saw it with your eyes you'd be convinced the Government had planted the idea into your head with a mind ray.

Don't bring down the intelligence curve with those types of comments.


Besides some close up photos do show debris being dug up and in the hole:


Ah yes, an engine. The heaviest/strongest part of the plane and it only travels a few feet deep. And what's that on the engine, rust?


Again, I thought the entire plane plunged underground? How did this fuselage piece manage to escape? And look, it's in the...FOREST! The part of the forest where the ground didn't burn!!!


Various pieces were thrown around, bearing in mind again this are some of the few pictures we have been shown:


Yeah, take debris doesn't look whethered and old! PLANTED in the FOREST!


This one too.


No fire damage to the ground???


No fire damage to the ground???



Btw, convenient this stray engine is found in a pond where it would be cooled off and hard to tell if it recently landed in there or was planted! See how I'm having a hard time with all these coincidences?

That's not a coincidence son, that's called being paranoid.

No, it's called astronomical odds for so many coincidences to happen like this.



I thought I read how body parts were found OUTSIDE the crater and, of course, in the woods? How did they manage to escape the plane and why no blood found around them?

Did you? Where's that then, I'm sure it's true but I didn't know. I thought they only found 8% of the human remains?

This is where I got it:


- Remains, like the aircraft wreckage itself, were scattered when the jet hit the ground at as much as 575 mph, then exploded in a fireball of fuel.
www.postgazette.com...

- The "X"s mark the trees that were scaled by climbers retrieving human remains, flung high and deep into woods by the force of the crash.
www.miami.com...


Yep there we go again, deep into the WOODS!





My point proven.

Or my point proven!



Or maybe it was planted?

Maybe, as I said that was the only thing I found slightly odd, though it's not impossible there is a reasonable explanation.

I'll invoke Occam's razor on the red bandana!


I'll let you know now, so you or anyone reading this doesn't think you've 'won' or that I'm backed into a corner, I can't be bothered to discuss it any further, the (lack of) logic is disturbing and I have better things to do, like go and watch my Monkey Dust DVD. Feel free to throw whatever you want at me and sit back with a smug look on your face thinking you've clinched it, I don't really care. Again, please excuse my slightly impatient tone, but it's frustrating having to watch the investigations go backwards over the years instead of forwards.

Sounds like you're wimping out on the debate buddy and things aren't going backwards because of this, we just haven't really opened our eyes wide enought about UA 93 (or the lack of it!).



posted on Jun, 4 2006 @ 09:34 PM
link   
imo Stop banging your head against the wall man.

imo The mods here have serious agendas and serious connections.

imo Your better off not discusing this stuff here. I mean it.

imo You wont get any good answers from these guys. They will just riddicule you and make fun of you, then when you get upset, they use that against you too.

imo I posted a thread once and it was immediatly attacked by number 2 himself and about 6 other mods. Then they did nothing but harrass me.

imo The mods consitently break the rules on this site. Watch dude - I will get it for this post -- lol


Put your passion and talent to better uses my friend



[edit on 4-6-2006 by AstralWanderer]



posted on Jun, 4 2006 @ 11:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by diggs
You are assuming that there were non-spooks with this team there. Why were they all in white and yellow jump suits? Concealing their identities? Only a hand full of jumpsuits were seen at the Pentagon washing the depleted uranium off them (oops, did I say that?).

I'm not sure (not being American) who the people in the yellow and white jumpsuits are. I'm trying to find out what a Go Team wears for an investigation, ie identifying jackets, ID, etc. My second thought is that I don't think a Go Team is that big.


And I bet it was just another in a long line of coincidences that part/all of this same team practiced in a terror drill the month before in the neighboring county?

A Go Team practice? Practice what? They're doing accident investigation all the time, not just aviation. National Transportation Safety Board fairly obviously includes transport accidents of all types, be they on the ground to begin with (train, etc) or "not supposed to be on the ground" (aviation). These guys are all specialists in their own fields, their only practice is their accident investigation/s and keeping academic qualifications up to date.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join